Did you fully read the story? I don't think this is the article you were hoping it to be. The child already had autism prior to the vaccine and that statement is from the mother herself- he was 3 when he got the vaccine as well.“He probably would still be autistic, but maybe he would have been slightly higher on the spectrum.” She believes Kaylan was born with the genetic pre-disposition for autism to begin with and she delayed giving the MMR ro her child.

Many things can make autism a child already has worse, the child could have contracted the actual measles and had the same regression but this story of course isn't saying the MMR caused autism in the least.

Many things can make autism a child already has worse, the child could have contracted the actual measles and had the same regression but this story of course isn't saying the MMR caused autism in the least.

Or he could just be a vile little sh*t with a parent who milks the system for all it's got.

But the measles do cause misery and death.Do you know that the last batch of mmr vaccines containing mercury preservatives expired in 2005? meaning that the vaccine this kid got did not even have the freaking mercury in it.

http://www.communicationagents.com/chris/2004...Anyone who believes the Chief Medical Officer of the United Kingdom is very foolish, IMO. The GMC is not above shutting up or prosecuting anyone who disagrees with their views. There does seem to be clear evidence of a link between autism and the MMR when these three vaccines are given simultaneously.

http://briandeer.com/mmr-lancet.htmThe Lance even tried to suggest Dr Andrew Wakefield published his research for monetary gain. What seems more likely is that authorities in the UK have assumed that there is no link between the MMR and autism because the link cannot be proven to their satisfaction. The mistake they make is the usual one in this country – if something is not proven concluively to be dangerous by rigorous scientific study, it is considered safe. If there is serious medical opinion backed up by research to suggest that there are grounds for believing the MMR is dangerous, however much disputed, the MMR should be treated as dangerous until it is proven to be safe.

I wish I had not given my son the MMR, but asked for the injections to be spaced as Dr Wakefield and others recommended. Fortunately it does not always cause outright autism. However, autism can be viewed as ‘a spectrum’ containing a number of conditions and syndromes. If one’s child develops any of them, one is bound to wonder...

Wakefield had a serious financial conflict of interest. At the time he published his study claiming that vaccines caused autism, he was being paid absolutely HUGE sums of money as an expert witness for people suing vaccine companies.

Read Paul Offit's book "Autism's False Prophets". He gives an excellent account of Wakefield and what he was up to. I don't see how anyone could read that book and STILL believe anything Wakefield says.

As that book documents, just about all of the "experts" claiming a vaccine-autism link have their own financial axes to grind.

Even without Offits book, Wakefield's study only consisted of 12 and they all had autism. None of the children didn't have autism. Of all the studies out there that state this that or the other that everyone disagree's with, why any would find this one study os 12 valuable. The study was critically flawed and had conflict of interest in which Wakefield was making a mint from being paid by attorney's. Wakefield's flawed study didn't even state the MMR caused autism anyway and those are his own words in interviews. What he said was some unknown- never named- new disorder was there in the gut.

Aside from all of that, pertaining to this article, the child already had autism prior to the vaccine and that statement is from the mother herself- he was 3 when he got the vaccine as well.

Even without Offits book, Wakefield's study only consisted of 12 and they all had autism. None of the children didn't have autism. Of all the studies out there that state this that or the other that everyone disagree's with, why any would find this one study os 12 valuable. The study was critically flawed and had conflict of interest in which Wakefield was making a mint from being paid by attorney's. Wakefield's flawed study didn't even state the MMR caused autism anyway and those are his own words in interviews. What he said was some unknown- never named- new disorder was there in the gut.Aside from all of that, pertaining to this article, the child already had autism prior to the vaccine and that statement is from the mother herself- he was 3 when he got the vaccine as well.

Exactly, but it is not proven that he simply misled people for cash. It was a limited study, of limited value and limited evidence that there was a link. Such a link has never been established to the satisfaction of the scientific community. That does not prove that there is no link. One could be equally sceptical of the studies that show there is no link whatever. It is the way people are silenced by authorities in this country that bothers me.

As Alan Johnson admitted regarding the Professor Nutt scandal, it is only Alan Johnson’s confidence that Professor Nutt needs to keep. Not anyone else’s. I think I have more confidence in Professor Nutt, whether I agree with his opinion or not, than Alan Johnson.

From:http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/nov/0..."Professor Nutt was not sacked for his views, which I respect but disagree with," [Johnson] writes. "He was asked to go because he cannot be both a government adviser and a campaigner against government policy." He did not campaign against government policy. It appears to me that he vociferously disagreed with it. Anyway it must surely be up to a scientific body to classify drugs A, B or C? It is for politicians to make the laws according to the classification scientists attach to them. If that were accepted it might clear up some of the confusion. From:http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/oct/3...“The government's chief scientist, Prof John Beddington, warned in August that ministers risk alienating science advisers and squandering their experience by dragging them into public rows. On that occasion, he was referring to Jacqui Smith's very public admonition of Nutt for his comments in an academic journal comparing the risks of ecstasy to horse-riding.”In my opinion, governments choose which scientific advice they favour and then inflict it on the rest of us. I repeat: The mistake they make is the usual one in this country – if something is not proven conclusively to be dangerous by rigorous scientific study, it is considered safe. If there is serious medical opinion backed up by research to suggest that there are grounds for believing the MMR is dangerous, however much disputed, the MMR should be treated as dangerous until it is proven to be safe. The principle should be that the MMR has to be proven to be safe. This has not been established and the precaution of giving the vaccine in three separate doses over a period of months has not been taken.

For these reasons I do not trust people like Alan Johnson with the health of my child.

Well, I'm sure he partly did it for fame and to get a study published. Others tried to replicate that study never produced his same results and no other GI doctor has seen this new mysterious gut issue Wakefield talsk about.

Wakefield was not a peds GI, yet he conducted painful tests on these kids. He took blood samples at a birthday party and laughed about the childrens reactions. The only link Wakefield produced is how to pin point one bad doctor, and how mealses rates jumped in the UK as the aftermath.

Even without Offits book, Wakefield's study only consisted of 12 and they all had autism. None of the children didn't have autism. Of all the studies out there that state this that or the other that everyone disagree's with, why any would find this one study os 12 valuable. The study was critically flawed and had conflict of interest in which Wakefield was making a mint from being paid by attorney's. Wakefield's flawed study didn't even state the MMR caused autism anyway and those are his own words in interviews. What he said was some unknown- never named- new disorder was there in the gut.Aside from all of that, pertaining to this article, the child already had autism prior to the vaccine and that statement is from the mother herself- he was 3 when he got the vaccine as well.

Thank you for this informed and thoughtful reply and for challenging my opinions. I may be mistaken about mistrusting official advice and I do not do so automatically. I am aware of the criticism of Dr Wakefield and how he has been discredited. It is his research that was interesting as it did not link the MMR directly with autism, but its effects on the immune system. So there might be a link, but not the one that people (often mistakenly) think he was suggesting. http://www.healthy.net/scr/article.asp...

Like I said earlier, Wakefield didn't say the MMR caused autism, and he said this in many interviews and on a recent interview he stated it again on Dateline. It was media and parents that misread/ inserted that it did cause autism. The reason why parents took the misleading idea it did cause autism is because all 12 in the study had autism, and they were wanting to sue, hence those attorney's who financed it.

What ever Wakefield is seeing in those intestines, no other GI doctor is also seeing, which alone that is rather fishy. The Government is suppose to protect us from bad studies as such. It's their job.

How the story line goes is the MMR never did contain Thimerosal, not every vaccine on the schedule ever had it, either. Wakefield's study wasn't about Thimerosal, it was about measles in the intestines and of course he was unable to provide if that occured due to a vaccine or to natural exposure to the measles. When the MMR was debunked from causing autism, some people then went onto the other contents of every vaccine and that's when and where Thimerosal entered the picture. Now if you look only at the Wakefield case/ study, prior to that no one linked vaccines to any autism. The power of suggestion and the fear that goes along with it is what happened.

Interestingly, as so much of the focus is vaccines and autism, everyone seems to forget vaccines always carried side effects of a certain percentage.

.. Now if you look only at the Wakefield case/ study, prior to that no one linked vaccines to any autism...the fear that goes along with it is what happened.Interestingly, as so much of the focus is vaccines and autism, everyone seems to forget vaccines always carried side effects of a certain percentage.

Who only looked at 'the Wakefield case'? I thought we had moved on from Dr Wakefield? And am I 'no one'? Many people, including scientists, were concerned about the possible connection between Autism and the MMR. The study is important because it points to part of a possible mechanism connecting MMR and autism.

You haven't answered my question about what might be causing the increase in autism, by the way. Any thoughts, if you are so certain that the effects of the MMR on the developing immune system cannot possibly have a connection?

'No one' meaning until Wakefield, there was no connection to autism and vaccines, and there really still isn't. That wasn't directed at you, of course, you can find that timeline any where. The idea was sort of in a round about way started by Wakefield and he was asked about that directly in interviews; the end result of his study starting all this and it still continues to Thimerosal, and any other content in vaccines some of which people (not you) make up to scare others.

The fact is, as of today not one study yet has proven concretely what causes autism and many studies have been done with vaccines. Many kids have gotten vaccines and yet no one can say why some have autism and most don't, or why more boys than girls.

The deal is regardless of vaccine choice, what we have is increasing autism rates and newly increasing out breaks of measles and other known things due to vaccine rejection.

I do not believe autism is an immune disorder, period. I also wouldn't believe mercury poisoning is autism. They have very much the same symptom's, but they are two different things.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Add your comments below

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.